Anglicans Ablaze is somewhat hot under the collar at the nasty catholic bits in the ACNA ordinal - chalice and paten, chasuable, anointing. Of these optional ceremonies in the ordinal, we are solemnly told:
These ceremonies and ornaments were tied to a number of Medieval Catholic beliefs and practices that had no basis in Scripture. They included the doctrines of transubstantiation, the sacrifice of the mass, and sacerdotal character of the priesthood. They were examples of the tendency of a fallen humanity to ignore the teaching of God’s Word and to replace it with teaching of its own devising.
As a result, "The new Ordinal breaks with the classical Anglican Ordinal". For Anglicans Ablaze, the catholic tradition within Anglicanism is simply illegitimate:
The reference to binding and loosing in the formula used at the imposition of hands in the ordination service for priests in the classical Anglican Ordinal is not understood to refer to the pre-Reformation Medieval Catholic and post-Tridentian Roman Catholic notion of absolution, but to the priest/presbyter’s binding and loosing through the proclamation of God’s Word. This is the received interpretation of this reference in the classical Anglican Ordinal. In the nineteenth century the Tractarians and the Ritualists would reinterpret that formula in what they described as “a Catholic sense,” interpreting the Ordinal according to the teaching of pre-Reformation Medieval Catholic and post-Tridentian Roman Catholic tradition and not the Scriptures, the Thirty-Nine Articles, the Homilies, and the writings of the English Reformers.
What this entirely ignores, of course, is the pre-Tractarian High Church tradition so ably portrayed by Nockles - a tradition grounded on Prayer Book and Articles, with a highly developed theology of ministerial priesthood, sacramental confession, and eucharistic sacrifice. To write this tradition out of the history of Anglicanism is not only grossly inaccurate - it also ironically reflects the arguments of those Roman apologists who have, over the centuries, denied Anglicanism's claims to catholicity.
Equally ironic is Anglicans Ablaze proposal that a contemporary 'reformed' Anglican ordinal should mimic the notoriously Latitudinarian 1792 PECUSA revision of the Ordinal:
The addition of an alternative formula for use at the imposition of hands in the ordination service for priests in the 1792 Ordinal of the Protestant Episcopal Church was consistent with the reformed Anglican understanding of the priest/presbyter’s role.
Take thou authority to execute the Office of a Priest in the Church of God, now committed to thee by the Imposition of our hands. And be thou a faithful Dispenser of the Word of God and of his holy Sacraments; In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.Even the Church of Ireland, when it came to revising the Prayer Book post-disestablishment and in a cultural context which ensured staunch hostility to Tractarianism, baulked at such a change to the Ordinal. Latitudinarian horror at the very idea that the Holy Spirit was active in the Church, bestowing the gift of the "order of priesthood" (see the rubric before the laying on of hands in the 1662 Ordering of Priests), and that the words of the Risen Christ addressed to the Apostles could likewise be spoken to those to be ordained priests, resulted in the PECUSA revision.
No, it won't do. You cannot invoke 1662 over and against post-ordination ceremonies of anointing etc and at the same time reject a key aspect of the 1662 Ordinal. Indeed, this is not just 1662 - the words "Receive the Holy Ghost ..." were also the form of ordination used in the 1552 Ordinal. Perhaps the words of Hooker will suffice to indicate why the classical Anglican Ordinal confers the order of priesthood with such words:
A thinge much stumbled at in the manner of giving orders is our using those memorable wordes of our Lord and Savior Christ, 'Receive the holie Ghost'. The holy Ghost they [the Puritans] saie wee cannot give, and therefore wee foolishlie bid men receive it ... he which giveth this power may saie without absurditie or follie 'Receive the holy Ghost', such power as the Spirit of Christ hath induced his Church withall, such power as neither prince nor potentate, kinge nor Caesar on earth can give ... Absurd it were to imagin our Savior did both to the eare and also to the verie eye express a real donation, and they at that time receive nothing ... Remove what these foolish wordes do implie, and what hath the ministrie of God besides wherein to glorie? (LEP V, 77.5-77.8).